Congress Delay and Disarray

PRODDED by the presidential threat of a post-Christmas special session, one of the slowest-moving Congresses in U.S. history belatedly bestirred itself. The result was the busiest legislative week of the year. The House passed four major bills--on voting rights, the antipoverty program, military appropriations and foreign aid--and in the process advanced the Administration's dual drives to cut costs and to please the South. The runaway Senate, however, ignored the direct challenge of a presidential veto and beat off all attempts to knock out any of the extravagant items of a politically appealing but economically ruinous tax package (TIME, Dec. 12). Combining tax cuts with new social security benefits, the bill would sabotage the Administration's campaign against inflation (see BUSINESS). All that frenzied action only served to underscore a harsh fact: the nation's legislative machinery is uncomfortably close to breaking down.

The crisis is not the familiar one of a President at loggerheads with a Congress controlled by the opposition party. It is more a case of neither knowing what the other wants, of neither being sure of its own directions. The President has waited unreasonably long to propose; the Congress has taken unconscionable time to dispose.

Complete Breakdown. Nearly everyone shares in the blame. One G.O.P. House leader says that he was "really amazed that the Administration didn't have a program when it came in--it's one of the great mysteries." Democratic House Leader Carl Albert accused the Administration of "repeated delays, obfuscation, confusion and lack of leadership." President Nixon, replying to the accusation at his press conference last week, insisted that some of his legislation has languished in Congress for up to six months. Another key Republican in the House blames the Democrats, claiming that there is a "complete breakdown between the chairmen of the committees and the Democratic leadership--they don't know what they're doing." There is some accuracy in each of those plaints.

Democratic House Speaker John McCormack, 78, has been shaken by both advancing age and disclosures of influence peddlers using his office, and has turned more cautious than ever. "McCormack doesn't want to offend anybody; he won't take positions that a leader ought to take," contends one of his Republican rivals. Albert has failed to pick up the slack, rarely rises to stake out policy positions. Senate Democratic Leader Mike Mansfield moves commendably once bills break out of committees, but he has been unable to discourage his colleagues from interminable chatter.

Senate Republican Leader Hugh Scott has infuriated many of his G.O.P. colleagues by opposing the President on the Haynsworth nomination and publicly complaining that the Administration ignores his advice on tactics. He sympathizes with those moderate Republicans who are openly angry about both their lack of access to the White House and the Nixon-Agnew tactics that alienate the nation's blacks and the young. House G.O.P. Leader Gerald Ford lacks dynamism, but is beginning to show parliamentary agility. In dealing with Congress, the Administration's Cabinet members are proving amateurish, and the President's liaison man Bryce Harlow is a slow mover, overburdened by other duties.

Counting on Wilbur. In one way or another, nearly every congressional ailment was on display in last week's Senate fight over the "Christmas tree" tax-reform bill. The fight to turn the bill back into a noninflationary package that the President could accept was led by Delaware Republican John Williams rather than any of the party's Senate leaders. He tried to knock out Democratic additions such as an extra $200 tax exemption for each dependent and a 15% rise in social security benefits, but failed to get twelve Republicans to join him, and lost 60 to 31 on the amendment. The bill faces an uncertain future in a House-Senate conference committee. The irony there, as Republican Ford puts it, is that the President is "depending on Wilbur to straighten it out." He means, of course, Democrat Wilbur Mills, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. The most likely area of compromise may be to stretch out the times at which the final bill's provisions will become effective, thus lessening the immediate financial impact.

The disorder was equally evident in actions taken by the House on four major bills:

FOREIGN AID. Already slashed a full billion dollars below the President's request (to $1.6 billion), the foreign-aid appropriation was headed for defeat midway through the roll call. Democratic liberals, longtime defenders of such aid, were dead set against a provision for spending $54.5 million on a squadron of F-4 fighter aircraft for Nationalist China. Counting heads, Minority Leader Ford knew that his only hope was to swing Republican votes. He latched on to the argument that the bill contained funds for Vietnamization of the conflict in Viet Nam and would help end the war. This persuaded six Republicans to switch and the bill passed by a mere 200 to 195.

VOTING RIGHTS. Instead of extending the Voting Rights Act of 1965--which safeguards the right of blacks to be registered as voters in seven Southern states and has actually led to the registration of some 800,000 blacks--the Administration proposed a new law that would apply to all 50 states. On the face of it, this seems only fair. But while the present law requires states to get Justice Department or federal court approval for any changes in registration procedures, the new act would require the Department to find any abuse of voting rights on its own and then file suits to stop it. The Judiciary Committee rejected the bill, and no Republican member of that committee wanted to lead a floor fight for it. Ford again stepped into the breach, offered it as a substitute for extending the present bill. The substitute trailed at the end of one roll call. Ford and Republican Whip Les Arends pressured those Republicans who had not yet voted, arguing that the President's prestige was on the line. To everyone's surprise, the Administration bill passed, but barely, 208 to 203. Most surprised of all was Clarence M. Mitchell, legislative director of the N.A.A.C.P. "The Nixon Administration," he charged, "has sold us out to get the segregation vote in the South."

MILITARY APPROPRIATIONS. After a testy but short debate, the House cut more than $5 billion from the Administration's request for defense funds. Opponents of the ABM could muster only 25 votes in an attempt to remove $359.5 million to begin deployment of the weapon. The $69.9 billion package carried 330 to 33.

ANTIPOVERTY PROGRAM. Democrats rescued the Administration from a revolt by Republican Congressmen, who tried to give states a veto power over community action programs funded by the Federal Government. The overconfident coalition of Republicans and Southern Democrats suffered from absenteeism and lost 231 to 163.

Emergency Extensions. Whereas the House has finally completed work on all of its appropriations bills for the year, the Senate has passed only five of the 14 required to finance the Government's operations. That means most departments are operating on emergency extensions of last year's level of support, and new programs are stalled. In school aid, for example, districts needed to know last summer what money would be available for this school year; although it is now nearly half over, they still cannot make plans. The financial crisis is not a mere matter of congressional sloth. The complexity of governmental financing is outrunning the ability of Congress to handle it, and the cumbersome procedure of tackling each funding twice--first to authorize the use of money for specific purposes, then to appropriate actual amounts--is straining the legislative machinery. Cries for procedural reform are rising again. With so many problems plaguing Congress--as well as the nation--the need for more efficiency on the Hill is fast becoming critical.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.